3 ms·
I don't think it's horrible, it just seems like a practical solution. It is such a taboo subject that nobody seems to really talk about the possibilities, but
by rootusrootus 4y ago
I don't think it's horrible, it just seems like a practical solution. It is such a taboo subject that nobody seems to really talk about the possibilities, but it's worth asking the question -- if someone so inclined can gratify their desires in private with fake imagery, will it prevent them from leaving their home and seeking out someone to hurt?
Or will it strengthen their need for 'the real thing' as someone else suggested in a sibling comment?
In any case, we still don't have a great answer for the legal question. Possession of realistic fake imagery is illegal, on the grounds that its very existence is a risk to children. There isn't any actual science behind that, it's just what the politicians have said to justify regulating what would otherwise be a constitutionally protected right. I imagine it will become a topic of discussion again (my quick research says the last major revision to US law in this regard was about 20 years ago).